"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

The only way to evaluate cost is what a hour of my time will buy. The way
countries juggle their currencies there is no other way to compare them.

Gordon

"Gordon Couger" wrote in message
...

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

The only way to evaluate cost is what a hour of my time will buy. The way
countries juggle their currencies there is no other way to compare them.

Gordon


I enjoyed that answer and can certainly appreciate the cause for it.

While negotiating with a Canadian company to assume funding which was
initially in US funds to me for greenhouse production improvements. I was to
be compensated a percentage of the transaction. As this constituted a
sizeable amount of money there were several pointed (and legally related)
questions due to the exchange rate and the significant advantage the
Canadians obtained by accepting my offer.

Did I get paid in Canadian funds or US funds and on what amount was the
percentage actually to be figured.

I was paid the percentage on Canadian numbers and in US dollars and we were
all happy. It did take some creative paper work to satisfy the Two
governments.

This was a hefty 6 figure amount and I reinvested the total lot in another
Canadian University project which is directed to improving food quality and
availability for the disadvantaged.

How did I determine what I wanted in dollars? I used modest but realistic
"value of my hourly time" for a period of two years to compensate for the
research and expenses.

James Curts

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 11:35:18 +1200, Evil *******
posted:

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 14:09:25 +0200, Torsten Brinch wrote:

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

Price of Big Mac in US$, as at April 24 2003
-------------------------------------------
snip

Whoa - pull up for a minute there sunshine.
Who said a Mig MAc qualifies as 'food'?

It is certainly a reasonable meal in Australia.

I could imagine the Big Mac of 2012 - prepared entirely from
laboratory-grown cultures.

Is this important? Doesn't the nutritional quality count for anything?

On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 12:00:53 +1200, "lily" posted:


"Evil *******" wrote in message
news
I could imagine the Big Mac of 2012 - prepared entirely from
laboratory-grown cultures.

Which could of course be produced "organically"
like tofu.

Tofu is neither organic (necessarily) or laboratory grown.

On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 18:16:43 -0700, Walter Epp
posted:

"Gordon Couger" wrote:
When the FDA and USDA say that there are no differences worth labeling most
of the people trust them as they trust them for assuring the safety of their
milk, meat and drugs. Our government does not work like a lot of
parliamentary governments that form a gang and railroad things though until
they can no longer agree and break up and make a new gang. Every issue
stands on its own.

Since we have reguatutory agencies with a long history and proven expertise
we trust them more than people in Europe seem to trust theirs.

Only if we are ignorant of how they are operating.
Michael Taylor worked for Monsanto, then went to work for the FDA where he
wrote the rules for labels regarding Monsanto's genetically engineered product
saying there's no difference, then he went back to work for Monsanto.

And you have evidence of any fraud or other wrongdoing?

When Richard Burroughs at the FDA held up approval due to scientifically
inadequate research and challenged company studies that dropped sick cows
from test trials and manipulated data in other ways to make health and
safety problems disappear, he was fired.

And where did you get this story from?

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
posted:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any nation in the world.

Big disposable income?

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:46:36 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

But in what currency? US dollars is hardly informative.

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:28:36 -0700, Walter Epp
posted:

"Moosh:]" wrote:
On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 21:03:33 -0700, Walter Epp
posted:

"Gordon Couger" wrote:
In the greenest
part of the country a vote on and anti GM law lost 3 to 1. We have some

That result was bought with over $6 per vote of out of state money
spent on a blitz of deception and scare tactics.

For instance? Show too where it is wrong please.

http://www.voteyeson27.com/Counterpoints1.pdf
This does not mention the possibility that labeling could increase jobs,
reduce costs of selling overseas, and make Oregon more competitive.
As Consumers Union points out in its letter supporting labeling, "Europe,
Japan, South Korea, China, Australia and New Zealand all have mandatory
labeling requirements, and a labeling law in Oregon would put the state in
a good position to sell products in those markets."

My query referred to the last part, "a blitz of deception and scare
tactics"

The best genetically modified democracy money can buy.

That's nearly as good as "Frankenfoods".

That law was not anti-gm, it only required that the consumer be allowed
to know what they're getting so there could be a free market.

Garbage. So that your lying scare campaigns could take effect.

Freedom is by definition the ability to make choices.

Only if you know and understand the facts.

Without labelling the consumer is denied knowing the facts.

Rubbish, you lot have bent any facts. Any label will only say "May
contain GM". What information does this convey?

You lot have gone out of your way to spread lies.

Show me which statement I have made that's a lie and why.

That there is any harm from GM foods. Otherwise, show us just ONE
example.

If there's no labeling, there's no choice, if there's no choice, there's
no freedom. To call this a free market is a fraud - it's a rigged market.

Then tell the truth. If there are scary lies promulgated, there can be
no informed choice, whatever information is given on a label.

And when biotech companies are censoring troubling information
there can be no informed choice.

Which troubling information?

Their opposition to labelling shows that genetic engineering proponents
don't believe their own propaganda.

Their opposition to labelling is due to gross ignorance of the general
public

Lack of labelling keeps the public in the dark.

No, after all the lies about scary consequences, nothing but darkness
confronts the public. Education and the facts are the only way to shed
light. Telling lies about all the harm that will ensue, and then
screaming that any trace of GM must be labelled is a tad hypocritical.

"Moosh:}" wrote in message
...

When Richard Burroughs at the FDA held up approval due to scientifically
inadequate research and challenged company studies that dropped sick cows
from test trials and manipulated data in other ways to make health and
safety problems disappear, he was fired.

And where did you get this story from?

put Richard Burroughs and fda into google and you discover millions of
websites which all seem to pass the same story among themselves. The guy has
apparently been canonised and god alone knows what the truth really is

Jim Webster

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:11:23 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
posted:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

The only way to evaluate cost is what a hour of my time will buy. The way
countries juggle their currencies there is no other way to compare them.

My question, but Torsten has apparently avoided it so far.

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 21:11:23 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

The only way to evaluate cost is what a hour of my time will buy.

I think you have got the two concepts 'price' and 'affordability'
mixed up.

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:20:24 GMT, "Moosh:}"
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:46:36 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

But in what currency? US dollars is hardly informative.

I was thinking of World Bank data for international
price comparisons. They do it in PPP terms, with
100 indicating [item] in [country in question] is
priced equal to the price in USA, and less than 100,
that it is cheaper. See:
http://rrojasdatabank.net/wdi2000/tab5_6.pdf


See also: The size of household consumption
(in "international" dollars calculated from PPPs).
in [country] and how much of it is going to e.g.
food, transportation, education.
http://rrojasdatabank.net/wdi2000/tab4_11.pdf

On Thu, 7 Aug 2003 08:30:07 +0100, "Jim Webster"
posted:


"Moosh:}" wrote in message
.. .

When Richard Burroughs at the FDA held up approval due to scientifically
inadequate research and challenged company studies that dropped sick cows
from test trials and manipulated data in other ways to make health and
safety problems disappear, he was fired.

And where did you get this story from?

put Richard Burroughs and fda into google and you discover millions of
websites which all seem to pass the same story among themselves. The guy has
apparently been canonised and god alone knows what the truth really is

It was really a rhetorical question, Jim, but you confirmed my
suspicions

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:19:02 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

I think you have got the two concepts 'price' and 'affordability'
mixed up.

Affordability is the only true price, IMHO.

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 18:53:38 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Thu, 07 Aug 2003 07:20:24 GMT, "Moosh:}"
wrote:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 10:46:36 +0200, Torsten Brinch
posted:

On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 07:29:29 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 01:43:18 GMT, "Gordon Couger"
wrote:
We do pay a price for having the cheapest food on the planet.

Myth: USA has the cheapest food on the planet

Fact: In 50 out of 63 countries worldwide, you can buy
a Big Mac hamburger cheaper than in USA.

We spend less of our disposable income on food than any
nation in the world.

That may be true or not, quite independently from the question
whether or not you have the cheapest food.

We don't live on Big Macs.

That's true. However, if you look at prices in USA of, say,
bread and cereals, or meat, they too are not the cheapest
on the planet.

But in what currency? US dollars is hardly informative.

I was thinking of World Bank data for international
price comparisons. They do it in PPP terms, with
100 indicating [item] in [country in question] is
priced equal to the price in USA, and less than 100,
that it is cheaper. See:
http://rrojasdatabank.net/wdi2000/tab5_6.pdf


See also: The size of household consumption
(in "international" dollars calculated from PPPs).
in [country] and how much of it is going to e.g.
food, transportation, education.
http://rrojasdatabank.net/wdi2000/tab4_11.pdf

But the best comparison is minutes of work done by average workers to
be able to afford the product of interest. Affordability is what we
want to compare, when you think of it.
$2 is "infinitely expensive" if you only have $1.